For what it's worth, here's an article I found on Engadget.com about the plight of DVD-Audio (and SACD)

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1633286875341629/

 

So true. People would rather get high quality mp3's and still fit more on a cd than a DVD-A.

 

Good article. I have been playing the Acura demo DVD disc the past few weeks, and I cannot readily discern the additional dynamic range nor the audio resolution. The 5.1 remix is interesting, but not compelling (yet). I've been perusing the DVD-A sites, and will see if some of the classical offerings can win me over.

 

I agree as well I would rather have had an mp3 option on the TL opposed to the dvd-A wich you cant find anywere but a few sites. Even then you can barely tell the diffrence. I have the 2 doors down cd and dvd-A slight changes that you can here in the diffrent songs not worth buying a whole collection of music only to play in the tl

 

If you're at all into Linkin Park, I would highly recommend the DVD-A version of Reanimation. IMO, it's an excellent 5.1 mix, and really blows regular CDs out of the water. Of course, I've always liked Linkin Park, so if you're not a big fan, you may not care much for it.

Also, you can buy DVD-Video players now which support DVD-A discs. Also, some DVD-A discs (Reanimation included) include a Dolby Digital mix, which is compatible with (nearly?) all DVD players.

 

I keep hearing such good things about this linkin park dvd. I might have to pick it up just to see how it sounds.

 

Thanks for the recomendation. I saw the reanm dvd and was going to pick it up. I like linkin park just wasnt sure about reanamation.

 

I listened to cuts of the Linkin Park Reanimation tracks, and I'm afraid it's not my cup of tea. You can check out some cuts of the tracks on Amazon before buying, if you're interested.

Oh, well - Reanimation may be an excellent disc, but I'll have to find a different favorite.

I have been waiting for the death of DVD-A pretty much since it was introduced. As I mentioned in a number of previous threads, there are a number of strikes against DVD-A that will make its struggle for acceptance very challenging.

Here's my thoughts:

(1) Consumers' acceptance of new standards have shown time and again that small improvements in quality alone are not enough for acceptance. Consumers want features and convenience, not just quality. A good example of this is Betamax vs. VHS. Betamax had a significant quality improvement over VHS at the time, but VHS offered a longer amount of recording time. VHS won. Another example: MP3s are poorer audio quality than the original media, but offered free downloading and about 10x more songs per CD. Many people have complained on this forum (myself included) that they would much rather have an MP3 player with lower quality than DVD-A with higher quality.

(2) DVD-A is a format without a genuine purpose, except to make money. The reason for good ol' 2-channel stereo sound was to try and audibly recreate the original soundstage using what is known as the "stereophonic effect". Remember those old computer generated "3-D" prints that would fool your eyes into seeing a 3D image? The same thing can happen with your ears if a 2 channel sound system is set up properly (many home systems aren't - I can't begin to list all the homes I've been to where the stereo speakers aren't on the same wall or at the same height). The concept was to immerse you deeper into the music by making it sound more realistic.

However, while multi-channel sound works really well in movies (since audio cues can occur all around you in a movie - such as a plane flying overhead), the same concept doesn't work well for music. Unless you play in the band that you are listening to on the DVD-A, playing a guitar in a left rear speaker and a drum set in the right front speaker doesn't recreate the original musical event - it's just a gimmick to get you to buy the disc because you think that it's cool. To recreate a concert event to make it sounc more realistic, I would only expect to hear the audience around me from the rear speakers, with maybe a little touch of acoustic ambience from the recording venue.

So, what does multi-channel sound provide for an audio-only experience? A new mechanism for the audio industry to get you to purchase a second disc that you already own as a CD in 2 channel stereo. Another suspicion that I have is that the industry wants DVD-A as a standard format because it requires significantly more data - reducing the amount of free downloads off the 'net.

(3) And, regardless of what many people think - DVD-A does not provide a significant audio improvement in quality over CDs. Sure, there definitely are technically measurable differences in the quality, but does not necessarily translate into significant audio improvements.

I can't emphasize this enough: What most people are thinking they hear as a difference in audio "quality" from DVD-A is simply the difference from remixing that was done to put the original stereo recording on DVD-A. I haven't found a re-released DVD-A yet that wasn't remixed from the original 2 channel format into multichannel DVD-A. Until I find a 2-channel DVD-A that wasn't remixed, there's no basis for comparison of improved "quality".

Your opinions may vary, of course!

 

DVD-A are awesome !!! I just hope they don't end up like Beta.

 

Listen to the STEREO Neil Young DVD-As and compare them with the re-released Neil Young Stereo CDs. If you do not hear a difference, then you do not need to bother with the format.

TITLES: Reactor, American Stars and Bars, On the Beach, and Hawks & Doves! (NOTE: Not to be confused with Harvest, Greendale, and Road Rock V1, where are surround DVD-A's and have been remixed for 5.1)

NOTE: These are the same mixes, the same recordings, everything is the same, except the DVD-A's are recorded in a higher resolution - A BIG DIFFERENCE!

Review of "On the Beach" - http://www.highfidelityreview.com/re...umber=14010029

 

Thanks, oblio98 - I'll check the Neil Young disks out. I'll check for them on Amazon, unless you know a better source ...

 

that's the problem, many of the remixes don't have enough dynamics in the original source so you dont get what dvd-a has to offer.

actually, lets make it simple by saying dvd-a is high-dynamic high-sample-rate PCM audio format and dvd is just the physical format. dvd is required for the huge files. i'm wondering how many players can decode the LPCM format??

new source that meets the dvd-a spec will sound awesome compared to normal CD or mp3, kinda like being at a symphony hall compared to a concert at a football stadium.

acceptance has to do woth the cost of players and cost to produce...

 

Amazon doesn't have a very good selection of them yet. I keep waiting for them to though.

 

Hi Guys,
I Have A Stupid Question, Will The Tl Stereo Play The Sacd Disks? I Have Noticed That There Is A Bigger Selection Than The Dvd-a. Thanks

 

the TL will not play SACD discs

 

THis place specializes in DVD-A, however, it is not always the cheapest - but a good selection

http://www.buydvdnow.com

:-jon

 

We only have TWO ears. Theoretically, every live listening experience can be duplicated with two speakers... if they are proximate to your ears. My computer's stereo speakers can replicate a sound that seems to come from behind me.

I agree that the spacial nature and placing of DVD-A, when done well, is still rather unnatural. You wouldn't hear some instruments behind you unless, as Jazz said, you play in a band all the time.

A live concert experiene puts all the music in front of you. Most groups have two stacks of speakers: right and left (in addition to their monitor speakers). Some don't bother amping in stereo for live performances but send a mono signal to their speakers. There are some exceptions. Pink Floyd and others that get into techno and effects will get fancy with rear speakers.

I don't particularly care for the "sameness" of Linken Park or the emphasis on rapp style music. But I love the DVD-A of Reanimation because of its excellent engineering and separation. It's also a preferred source for showing off the TL's sound system- especially to those who ARE into that music. There is a separate bass signal for the subwoofer which really makes it come alive back there. It also has a good dynamic signal with a ton of volume available. Even at half volume, it rocks. But, you can forget about the Navi girl, HFL or radar detectors while listening to it. You will have a crazed smile on your face and a small trickle of blood running down from your ear.

 

If you only need to hear what comes from in front of you, why does EVERY car have speakers in the rear? For the rear seat passengers?

:-jon

 

"Theoretically" is the key word here.

Mike

 

Jon,

Imagine that your ears are microphones. Everything that your ears hear can be recorded by two microphones. When you hear something behind you it because of a slight delay in the reception of those sound waves and echos and harmonics bouncing off the surface of your ears.

Everything two microphones hear can be reproduced over two speakers (again, I say, theoretically). Capturing those nuances and reproducing them is complicated stuff.

I am not saying that you only need to hear what comes in front of you. I am saying that the delayed echos which come from behind you in a concert hall or stadium setting can be "faked" by sending them through two speakers so convincingly that you will be whipping around to see where they came from. It's the aural equivalent of an optical illusion.

 

I was thinking about this on the way home (while listening to some 5.1 Pink Floyd and then some stereo Pink Floyd off of a homemade DVD-A), and it occurred to me that listening to music is far more than an auditory experience. Speakers from the left and right cannot simulate the sound wave field directly acting on the front or back of your head, which you can feel, and which is part of the total sensory cues of the music-listening experience.

I think that's why multi-speaker setups work so much better than simple two-speaker setups. It's because when we listen we are using far more than two microphones buried in our ears.

Mike

 

I know what you're saying. It's just an age old argument that anything other than traditional "stereo" for music is gimmicky or overkill. This is an argument that can go on for many posts, and is really not worth getting into, as it only rehashes tired old arguments from both sides.

As for me, I enjoy having the "mix" spread out, over the 5 main channels, and it's not really that I enjoy having sounds coming from behind me - it's more that the same amount of music is reproduced and distributed through 3 more "portals" than stereo, thus allowing me to "hear" things clearer, things that I might miss in the stereo mix.

As with the demo DVD-A, when ES takes us through the mix of "Winelight", we hear the pieces in a way that cannot be discerned in the stereo mix. You could take the 5 speakers (at home), place the front/center/right in front of you, then take the rear surrounds, and put them in front of you as well, just to the "outside" of the mains, and you can create a great diverse sound experience, with instruments and vocals seperated from each other, and still coming from in front of you if you like.

This presentation would, IMHO, give a broader representation than the same amount of music coming from two single speakers.

I also happen to think that the car is an optimum environment for surround sound. I mean, every car has rear speakers, so why not send discrete information to them? What's the point of having the same audio information go to the rears that goes to the front? (In the old days, this was done because cars had crappy front speakers and you could put big suckers in the back, I know)

A well balanced system like the ELS system can be fun and enjoyable. The biggest problem, bar none, is the lack of titles for purchase. Hopefully, that will improve in the future.

Until then, I am glad we have the DVD-A/DTS capability in the TL.

:-jon
www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums
www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/

 

with everything both you and svtmike are saying. The ELS experience is indeed a thrilling experience. But we are still hearing those sounds with only two ears. The only way we know that the sounds are coming from behind us is to turn our head and compare relative SPLs (sound pressure levels) or to analyze the delays- which we do automatically in our brain without thinking about it. Our ear drums are "elements" which vibrate according to the waves that hit them. You can have 20 speakers but we still only have two ear drums which are, in essence, transducers- translating varying waves into minute electical energy. They face mostly outward toward our ear canals- left and right.

The difference in amplitude and time gives our brain the raw data it needs to calculate the probable location of the source. It does all this with two audible data streams.

As Mike points out, though: that is not the only source of data the brain has to work with. If something is parting your hair in the back at the same time you hear a loud low frequency sound, that is another clue. Visual clues can also enter the mix.

However, we amateur audiophiles know that low frequency sounds are not as directional as high frequencies. Hence: only one subwoofer. It doesn't matter a great deal where you place it (except for reinforcement concerns) because we 'feel' it more than hear it.

The shape of our outer ear allows us to scan to determine the direction sounds are coming from by relative strength- like a radio direction finder does with RF.

But, with our heads in a fixed position, we work with echos and time delays to determine the location of the source. These can be counterfeited and often are. Very effectively and convincingly, I might add.

As I mentioned before, even my cheesy computer speakers can make a sound that sounds like it is coming from behind me.

All that academic stuff said, I love my ELS Surround Sound in the TL. It has an elusive sweet-spot and I'm not sure when it's perfect for me that it's good for all the passengers.

I've also noticed that I can change the "color" of the sound by opening or closing the shade on my moon roof. It's like adding or removing a drape. Open the shade and: Voila! better highs.

 

The ELS system of TL can also play DTS CD's. I extracted some AC3 audio tracks from DVD-Video's, converted them to 5.1 DTS wave files, burned them to CD's. These DTS CD's sound awesome!

 

hey xiaxia that sounds cool, I think I want to try that. A few questions if you dont mind

1) How many songs in the 5.1 DTS wav format can you fit on a CD?

2) Can extract audio from any DVD-Video?

3) Can you explain the steps you took to create those CDs in detail (ie software/hardware used etc)? Maybe create a little tutorial?

Thanks!

 

To do what xiaxia is saying, you need SureCode DTS (a $500 package). Discwelder Bronze to make DVD-A's is much cheaper.

Mike

 

500 Bucks yikes! Can Discwelder Bronze convert CD wav files to 5.1 or extract audio from dvds?

 

SurCode DTS CD costs $99. The $500 package is for DTS DVD.

The steps to make DTS CD is pretty simple:

1. Extract AC3 audio from DVD-Video. Software: DVD Decrypter
2. Decode AC3 to 6 wave files(one for each 5.1 channel). Software: BeSweet
3. Encode 6 wave files into one DTS wave file. Software: SurCode CD-DTS
4. Burn to CD as normal audio CD. Software: anything that can make audio CDs.

You can use BeSure, an interface to BeSweet and SurCode DTS, to do both step 2 and 3 easily.

DTS wave files are a little bigger than stereo ones. A 74 minutes CD-R may hold 50-60 minutes DTS audio. You can also play these DTS CDs on your home theatre system(if your player/receiver can decode DTS).

 

Okay thanks xiaxia, Ill check that stuff out. A few more questions if you don't mind

1) Does any dvd-video work? Or does it have to be a dvd that uses dts surround? I'm interested in getting some live concert/performance dvds, or maybe music video dvds. Im not sure what the sound format the majority of these dvds use.

2) What dvd-videos did you extract from?

Thanks.

 

You're right, but that's a temporary price drop (until the end of November). Anyway, for the same price I'd much rather get a DVD-A authoring package. Why?

- Much more music on a single disc.
- Ability to mix stereo and 5.1 content.
- Built-in error correction (no highly annoying pops and clicks as can happen with DTS CDs).

Mike

 

Kindred97, I have done something similar to what xiaxia has done. I have a pretty extensive collection of DVD-Video concerts. What I have done is used a program called DVD Audio Extractor to extract the 5.1 audio from the DVD-Video concerts. DVD Audio Extractor is the "ONLY" program that I have found that can extract the 5.1 without issue and in one step. I have tried three or four other dvd audio extraction tools and DVD Audio Extractor works best for me and my computer. After I have extracted the audio, I then use DiscWelder to import the tracks and burn to DVD. DiscWelder recognizes the imported audio as 5.1, you can see the individual channels in DiscWelder.
I spent several days trying to find the easiest way for me to do this process and so far this has worked for me flawlessly.

 

i hav onl found 2 discs that are dvd-a, do u no of any other dvd-a cd on the
market?

 

TRY HERE or HERE or HERE

Especially the last one, a price checker. Search on key words "DVD-A"

That ought to get you started. Enjoy.